05a01010
09-28-2000
Mark A. Bate, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Great Lakes Area), Agency.
Mark A. Bate v. United States Postal Service (Great Lakes Area)
05A01010
September 28, 2000
.
Mark A. Bate,
Complainant,
v.
William J. Henderson,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Great Lakes Area),
Agency.
Request No. 05A01010
Appeal No. 01975896
Agency No. 4J480100794
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Mark A. Bate (complainant) initiated a request to the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the decision in
Mark A. Bate v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01975896
(September 20, 1999).<1> EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission
may, in its discretion, reconsider any previous Commission decision
where the requesting party demonstrates that: (1) the appellate decision
involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or
(2) the appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies,
practices, or operations of the agency. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b).
After a review of the complainant's request for reconsideration, the
previous decision, and the entire record, the Commission finds that the
request fails to meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b), and it is
the decision of the Commission to deny the request. The prior decision
held that complainant's appeal was untimely because it was filed more
than four months after the expiration of the applicable filing period.
Complainant did not offer a sufficient explanation of this delay on
appeal, nor does he offer one in his request for reconsideration.
Accordingly, the decision in EEOC Appeal No. 01975896 remains
the Commission's final decision.<2> There is no further right of
administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request
for reconsideration.
COMPLAINANTS' RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0400)
This decision of the Commission is final, and there is no further right
of administrative appeal from the Commission's decision. You have the
right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District
Court WITHIN NINETY (90) CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this
decision. If you file a civil action, YOU MUST NAME AS THE DEFENDANT IN
THE COMPLAINT THE PERSON WHO IS THE OFFICIAL AGENCY HEAD OR DEPARTMENT
HEAD, IDENTIFYING THAT PERSON BY HIS OR HER FULL NAME AND OFFICIAL TITLE.
Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your case in court.
"Agency" or "department" means the national organization, and not the
local office, facility or department in which you work.
RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z1199)
If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot
afford the services of an attorney, you may request that the Court appoint
an attorney to represent you and that the Court permit you to file the
action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.;
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c).
The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of
the Court. Filing a request for an attorney does not extend your time
in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action
must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above
("Right to File A Civil Action").
FOR THE COMMISSION:
______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
September 28, 2000
__________________
Date
1On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's federal
sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations apply
to all federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in the
administrative process. Consequently, the Commission will apply
the revised regulations found at 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 in deciding the
present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the
Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.
2 We note that while the prior decision was dated and mailed on September
20, 1999, complainant did not file his request for reconsideration until
June 23, 2000, long past the 30-day expiration period. Complainant
contends that he did not receive a copy of the prior decision until June
2000 when the agency gave him a copy during a pre-hearing conference
involving related matters. A review of the file reveals that while
complainant's copy of the prior decision was sent to an incorrect address,
a copy of the decision was also mailed to complainant's attorney. This
copy was mailed to the address provided by complainant on his appeal form.
Commission regulations note that when a complainant designates an attorney
as representative, service of all official correspondence shall be made
on the attorney and the complainant, but time frames for receipt of
materials shall be computed from the time of receipt by the attorney. See
29 C.F.R. � 1614.605(d). Complainant does not argue that his attorney did
not timely receive a copy of the prior decision. However, because there
is no evidence in the record confirming that complainant's attorney timely
received the prior decision, we have assumed that complainant's request
for reconsideration was timely filed. Although complainant expresses
a concern that he was denied the opportunity to file a civil action,
he still has that opportunity, as noted in the body of this decision.